Some of you get triggered by words like "natural" or "processed". You say it's genetics, you've been eating like this all 22 years of your life and you feel fine, and you don't see the need for such words. This is for you.
Let's entertain for the sake of argument the idea that there could be a distinction between an onion 5 minutes after you pulled it out of the ground, and a pack of funyuns.
What word would you propose we use to distinguish the two?
One is an onion and one is an onion flavored corn snack, or alternatively corn snack with hints of powdered onion.
>>7277669
We're going for brevity here, anyone can write a paragraph description of a food.
>>7277670
Funyuns have extremely little to do with onions mate. It's like claiming those surimi sticks are crab legs. If you want to use one word then you can use "imitation" onion.
>>7277674
Imitation is a good one.
But this is too specific. Broadly speaking, how would you categorize stuff like funyuns, Hi-C, and hot pockets, compared to onions, biodynamic artisanal heritage juices, and VPN AOCG Neapolitan pizza?
>>7277688
>Vegatable: onions
>Processed food: everything else
>>7277688
garbage
>>7277670
Then let's just call it a corn snack. That's close to a complete description of a lot of junk food.
Natural is a completely meaningless buzzword. It has no agreed upon definition when it comes to food labeling, and even if it did, its mostly just used to trick consumers into thinking being 'natural' makes it healthier. Its fucking crazy how many people buy into the myth that natural=healthy
>>7278075
>funyuns are exactly the same as onions
>penn & teller told me so
>science is so kewl guise!!!!
>>7278082
Do you even know what funyuns are? They're fucking corn snacks. Not even the greatest retard would claim it's onions. It has nothing to do with words like "natural".
>>7278082
>shitting on Penn and Teller because they blew your God Book the fuck out
>>7278082
>>funyuns are exactly the same as onions
What? Thy aren't even marketed as such
>>7278096
You shouldn't need adjectives to make a distinction between two entirely different objects. It's like saying you need the term "pure-breed" to make a distinction between a cat and a dog.
I use adblock and I don't watch television. I'm sorry I didn't use an example that resonates with hamplanets who understand every sociological nuance of their junk food. The point still stands.
>>7278096
>believing in faith over science
Do you live in the middle ages?
Being natural has no correlation with being healthy, and same with artificial and unhealthy. Yet marketers have convinced an extraordinary number of people otherwise. The government should prosecute such people for false advertising but they don't
>He apparently believes all food is identical
I don't even know what you are trying to do here man
>>7278117
Do reddit atheists ACTUALLY believe that people who choose not to constantly inhale junk food must be religious maniacs?
>>7278126
You were literally just saying science is bad. This has nothing to do with junk food, junk food can be just as natural as any other food
>>7278106
Are there a lot of shady corporations trying to sell cats as "real dog animal* (*cat)"?
Are there a lot of Americans who leap to the defense of such companies, claiming that it's their freedom to be lied to, that dog is just a generic term for pet, and that anyone who disagrees is protectionism?
>>7278144
I've never seen someone strawman so hard
>>7278140
I never said science is bad. I said a lot of teenage neckbeards learn "deep" thoughts like "dihydrogen monoxide is just water LMAO" and based on this we should all inject our mechanically-separated turkey breast with uranium hexaflouride because there's no such thing as natural LMAO SCIENCE IS SO KEWL
In other words, a misappropriation of the word "science"
>>7278144
Nobody has ever claimed funyuns are onions, there is literally nobody who thinks that or advertise funyuns as onions. In fact onions are cheaper than funyuns so tricking people into thinking funyuns are onions is totally retarded.
>>7278160
Sure buddy. Consumers are never hoodwinked and no one ever leaps to the defense of the hoodwinker, like you're doing now.
>>7278154
>a misappropriation of the word "science"
Where is this actually happening? All of your examples are not actual things. Ignorance of science and lack of scientific literacy is a major problem, and marketers continuously take advantage of this as evidenced by how common a marketing buzzword 'natural' is
>>7278168
Thats like saying Bud Light/Heineken aren't beer. Cheap shitty examples of a product can still call themselves by what they are
It kind of funny that you are against companies making cheap things of a style saying they are indeed of that style, but you are completely ok with the industry promoting the natural=healthy myth and filling their labels with meaningless buzzwords specifically designed to trick consumers
>>7278170
>no one ever pretends to be a scientist in the internet in order to pretend shitfood isn't the problem
Because you want innocent people to think shitfood is just as healthy as natural food, this is why you're mad.
>>7278154
>I never said science is bad
You constantly post about how bad science is and how religion is good
>>7278187
Specifically where did I say the caliphate of Shekih Barack Bin Hussein Al-Obama shall reign for over 10,000 year of darkness? Because it's not that this is wrong, but I thought it was a secret that would only be known to the chosen few until you rational science atheists and your un-q'ranic ways are all in FEMA camps where we will force you to pledge allegiance to Karl Marx the greatest human who ever lived.
>>7278186
How do you still not get this? Natural food can be healthy and it can be shitty, Food with artificial ingredients can also be both
You are the only one advocating for allowing shitty food to trick people into thinking they are good by use of the word 'natural'
>>7278199
>lol atheist sucks, fuck Penn and Teller, praise Jesus
Yeah, your 'natural food' and lack of 'western education' is clearly working out well for you
>>7278211
>raw onions are shitty and icky
>we should only eat processed garbage because it's good and I feel totally fine
Go pet your Monsanto® Catdog® Real Dog Animal* (Cat), adults are talking
>>7278222
Do you seriously think people considering funions as a replacement to onions is a thing?
>>7278222
Of course you'd be afraid of GMO too
>>7278241
I wouldn't know, I've never actually met the kind of people who actually buy funyuns. It was just an analogy, it's difficult for a reasonable person to get in the mindset of the kind of people who eat such things.
>>7278248
pretty sure people eat them like chips, not in place of onions in recipes
>>7278248
Why can't you admit you're wrong?
>>7278255
How do you explain all this shit I found through google such as:
>tyson nuggies, buffalo sauce, real cheese topping, funyuns
I'm pretty sure if you don't like this, you're not even considered a real patriot:
http://imgur.com/QBtTDAp
>>7278270
dude, buffalo sauce is named after the city, not trying to trick people into thinking it is actually made of buffalo
>>7278276
Knowing this, I bet that guy wants the government to put some economic protection in place banning anyone not in Buffalo from making buffalo sauce because liberty is bad
>>7278285
"That guy" here, I'd prefer that we just ban buffalo sauce. Hell let's just ban the existence of Buffalo, NY. What a shithole.
it's already there
there's "fun" in one
and just bitter tears in the other
>>7278270
>How do you explain all this shit I found through google
Novelty bullshit created by stoners is not representative of typical food.
>>7278216
Penn & Teller really are idiots though
>>7277667
are funyuns actual onions or are they just meme onions
>>7279839
Please understand, due to the Texas School Board teaching science is illegal in American public schools. As a result who is an independent-minded young rational atheist to learn from but two comedians on TV?
In America, if you are not an out of control alcoholic it's because you're a christfag, and if you don't lap up infotainment "science is kewl" sketch comedy from TV and hang on every word like it's the Gospel of the Atheist Jesus, it's because you hate science and want to take the Dawkins away from us.
>>7279839
how so?
Are you some kind of statist evangelical/mormon?
I mean not all of their stuff is very compelling, but usually its logical.
You probably preferred Family Guy to South Park when you were a teen
>>7279845
They are just onion flavored cheetos in the shape of a ring
>>7279848
Why do you hate logical thought so much?
>In America, if you are not an out of control alcoholic it's because you're a christfag
Not sure what this has to do anything, but it is generally true that Americans who do not drink for reasons besides health requirements are overwhelmingly crazy protestants
Also, is your image supposed to be anti-science as your post is? Is it trying to compare god to electricity, or is it mocking those that would? It sure seems to be mocking people that think like you, so I am kind of confused as to why you would post it
>>7279869
Why don't you accept Jesus in your heart, atheist? Science and the demon drink won't get you unto His kingdom.
>>7279858
Not him.
They themselves admitted in a Q&A that in Bullshit, they manipulate the facys to make it more palatable to the public.
You might think now, like I did, that this was some minor embellishment. The I saw maddox'es (another idiot) video reply to one of their episodes about him: maddox is basically an internet cunt that makes money by being a shit person. P&T wanted to cashgrab on an easy episode, and interwieved maddox about his outrageous opinion about old people smelling; their test? Get half a dozen old farts, have them play bball with their kids, then have all of them shower with soap for 20 minutes and compare armpit smell.
Tl;dr don't trust magicians from the strip
>>7279909
>Tl;dr don't trust magicians from the strip
I'd call them comedians, not magicians. The magician thing is just the setup to the joke. They are just like a smart, more logical Jon Stewart
>>7279858
>everyone grew up chained to a television
I bet if I told you I didn't, you'd think I was trolling or insane.
>>7279939
Unless if you had neglectful parents you grew up with access to a TV
I mean we really should not allow people to raise children with an Amish lifestyle, if you want to live like that cool, but don't subject innocent children to thid
>>7278092
If I saw them speak about Christianity, it would probably convert me to Christianity. Their investigations are always so unconvincing and transparently biased.
>>7279950
>all this Stockholm syndrome
We had a huge home library, early home computers (early 80s), nice bikes (no BSO shit), and actually fun toys (microscopes, telescopes, model rockets, etc). Not to mention a well equipped kitchen.
I'm sorry your parents didn't love you anon :(
>>7279965
>>all this Stockholm syndrome
What does any of this have to do with Stockholm syndrome?
>>7279965
Well if you were a teen in the early 80s, I don't blame you, TV was terrible back then
>>7279970
Put on your thinking cap, anon. Not all of us feel strong, unwavering loyalty to a machine our abandonparent parked us in front of as a substitute for good parenting.
>>7279978
>having such outdated views
You sound like a really fun guy. Also thats not what Stockholm syndrome means
>>7279990
I think we've established that your idea of fun and my idea of fun have nothing in common. You sound like that guy who thinks eating junk food and drinking shit quality alcohol is "fun" and you get mad when some people disagree. Yes? That you?
>>7279998
I'd rather drink good alcohol, but if none is available (can't recall the last time I was in such a situation) shitty stuff is better than nothing
I don't really eat junk food for fun. I am having trouble picturing what you are imagining with this comment. Like a guy who sits down with a bag of cheetos and just gets really excited and happy? Is that a thing?
